odd/bad pleating #3

[Tobus]

+ 1. I think that's EXACTLY what they did and to my eye, the result is less than 'great'. When you can give one pleat a touch more and another a touch less and have a NICE pattern, why would you pleat it this way?

As to why, I don't really know. And I agree with your previous statement that it's an art form to make pleats look pleasing (I know your work from first-hand experience).

But I think the reason that one looks odd is that the pattern with the red stripes ends up on the right. It throws the whole thing off balance. However, when I look at paulhenry's example where it's the same pattern and the same tartan (I think), but with the red pattern symmetrical and centered on the rear of the kilt, it actually looks pretty good. No, it's not a repeating pattern across the back of the kilt, but it still looks like it was done that way on purpose, for a different effect than what is normally seen, and doesn't necessarily look bad. Not to me, at least. I can certainly understand how it might be 'less than great' to someone who makes kilts for a living, though, and sticks to a particular set of rules.

I would certainly think that the kilt maker who did the one paulhenry posted considers it his own special art form with that particular style. It requires a bit of thinking outside the box, and it's not bad ...just different.

[Paul Henry]

As to why, I don't really know. And I agree with your previous statement that it's an art form to make pleats look pleasing (I know your work from first-hand experience).

But I think the reason that one looks odd is that the pattern with the red stripes ends up on the right. It throws the whole thing off balance. However, when I look at paulhenry's example where it's the same pattern and the same tartan (I think), but with the red pattern symmetrical and centered on the rear of the kilt, it actually looks pretty good. No, it's not a repeating pattern across the back of the kilt, but it still looks like it was done that way on purpose, for a different effect than what is normally seen, and doesn't necessarily look bad. Not to me, at least. I can certainly understand how it might be 'less than great' to someone who makes kilts for a living, though, and sticks to a particular set of rules.

I would certainly think that the kilt maker who did the one paulhenry posted considers it his own special art form with that particular style. It requires a bit of thinking outside the box, and it's not bad ...just different.

I am very sure it is a guilty kilt, but i don't think they are in business anymore, their chief market was one of fashion kilts, and some of them were very interesting ( and different) appealing to a much younger and trendier market. I remember talking to the chap in my photo (who incidentally I gave him the confidence to wear a kilt a few years previously as we were chatting in bar in Gent) that he had bought it because it as a little unusual, and that each time a kilt as made in that tartan ,they were all unique as the pleating was arranged differently each time.
On a more general point I think we need to distinguish between a designed or considered arrangement , and one that is just rather "hit or miss" The three kilts here have been carefully worked out and because of that (whether we like them or not) they are not bad or wrong, but as Tobus rightly says, just different!

[Mudge]

Right on spot Jock!!!

Frankly how many would notice and even if they did would they know any better? I do think that some of us on this website are starting to be rather unnecessarily, unrealistically and rather unkindly fastidious over these details. I can quite understand if you are the customer who is spending a large amount of loot on a bespoke kilt, then these details are a rightfully expected priviledge for the customer to have what he wants, but come on chaps be a bit realistic!

[Alan H]

Perhaps time to review this page from the Scottish Tartans Museum??

http://www.scottishtartans.org/macduff_kilt.htm

This is the oldest known, surviving civilian kilt, in the MacDuff tartan. In other words, about as "traditional"...if "traditional" = "old" as it is possible to be.

Before hollering about how horrible it is that a kilt is pleated whichever way, maybe it's worth looking at those pictures, again.

BTW, PERSONALLY, I would rather not own/wear a kilt pleated like that. But hey, that's me. Just because that's my opinion doesn't mean that it's WRONG, or sacreligious somehow. If a customer wants their kilt pleated to no pattern, then what the heck?

[RockyR]

Before hollering about how horrible it is that a kilt is pleated whichever way, maybe it's worth looking at those pictures, again.

Alan,

I don't think anyone is "hollering", just saying that it's not difficult to make it look a bit nicer (orderly, patterned, even, balanced, whatever you want to call it), so why not take the extra few seconds, lay out the cloth, figure out a 'repeatable pattern' that works within the length of cloth given and do it to that. Again, I'm not saying one way is wrong and the other correct... There are many ways to skin a cat. I'm just saying a little care goes a long way.

The Tartan Museum's kilt may have been "the way the average kilt was done" back a couple hundred years ago, but they also used an average of 4 yards of cloth back then, not 8. Just as the kilt itself has 'evolved' in certain ways over the last 200+ years, so has the way it's put together / pleated.

[Alan H]

Alan,

I don't think anyone is "hollering", just saying that it's not difficult to make it look a bit nicer (orderly, patterned, even, balanced, whatever you want to call it), so why not take the extra few seconds, lay out the cloth, figure out a 'repeatable pattern' that works within the length of cloth given and do it to that. Again, I'm not saying one way is wrong and the other correct... There are many ways to skin a cat. I'm just saying a little care goes a long way.

The Tartan Museum's kilt may have been "the way the average kilt was done" back a couple hundred years ago, but they also used an average of 4 yards of cloth back then, not 8. Just as the kilt itself has 'evolved' in certain ways over the last 200+ years, so has the way it's put together / pleated.

I think that Paul Henry actually knows these guys, and his take on it was that the kilt wasn't made that way out of carelessness or inattention to detail. They did it that way on purpose. At least, that's how I read it. I'm guessing that in fact, the kiltmaker probably spent a bit of time to specifically NOT line up pleats and stripes and patterns in the "usual" way. You know...a "fashion statement" and all that.

So then the discussion changes from "look at this sloppy, awful pleating job" to..."What do you think about this style of pleating"? ...which seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable discussion, in and of itself.

Like the title of the thread....odd/bad pleating


To me, it seems like "bad pleating" is kind of the same thing as "badly done pleating" and I think we both know what THAT suggests! ....horizontal stripes don't line up, pleats not the same width, poorly done stitching and so on. "badly done pleating" = shoddy workmanship.

Without inspecting this kilt close-up we can't say whether the workmanship is bad or not. I'm inclined to give the fellow the benefit of the doubt and assume that he did it well: the stitching is tight, the buckles sewn on stoutly and so on. That said, this kilt very well might qualify for "Odd Pleating" as per the OP's original title...That's for sure!

I think it's safe to say that this kilt is not pleated to Rocky's taste! I bet we're on safe ground with that statement! BTW, it's not pleated to my taste, either.

[RockyR]

MY COMMENTS ARE POSTED WITH TONGUE FIRMLY PLANTED IN CHEEK... I'm not trying to pick a fight with Alan (he and I get along very well as a matter of fact).

I think that Paul Henry actually knows these guys, and his take on it was that the kilt wasn't made that way out of carelessness or inattention to detail. They did it that way on purpose. At least, that's how I read it. I'm guessing that in fact, the kiltmaker probably spent a bit of time to specifically NOT line up pleats and stripes and patterns in the "usual" way. You know...a "fashion statement" and all that.

So then the discussion changes from "look at this sloppy, awful pleating job" to..."What do you think about this style of pleating"? ...which seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable discussion, in and of itself.

So, I won't mention the fact that the "red section" is on the left hand side (as worn) of the apron and the "grey section" is on the right hand side by the fringe... neither the red or grey is centered on the apron as would happen on most kilts (i.e. pick a dominant stripe or section to center on the apron). And the waistband doesn't match up with the apron tartan. And the tartan belt loops don't match the section of tartan they're covering. Nope... won't mention that.

**thinks to himself... if they are trying to break all these 'kiltmaking rules / conventions', then why are they even using tartan?**

I think it's safe to say that this kilt is not pleated to Rocky's taste! I bet we're on safe ground with that statement! BTW, it's not pleated to my taste, either.

Finally something we agree on!

[Alan H]

Ah, me'n Rocky get along great....no worries!


But what if the kiltmaker did all of those things on purpose? Hey, to my eye, having the waistband front not line up with the tartan pattern bugs me, too, but what if they kiltmaker consciously decided to break that "rule"?

It actually doesn't surprise me that the over-apron isn't centered. I mean, considering how the kiltmaker pleated the back, I'd be surprised if the front was symmetrical. Actually, the way the kilt is folded in that picture, it *might* be centered. I kind of don't think so, either but it *could* be.

And if you're going to break those rules, why make the belt loops match?

All very odd, in contrast to how a more traditional kilt is made, absolutely. But if it's done on purpose, then is it badly done, shoddy workmanship, or is it an aethetic choice which you and I may not like very much?

[Friday]

Frankly how many would notice and even if they did would they know any better? I do think that some of us on this website are starting to be rather unnecessarily, unrealistically and rather unkindly fastidious over these details. I can quite understand if you are the customer who is spending a large amount of loot on a bespoke kilt, then these details are a rightfully expected priviledge for the customer to have what he wants, but come on chaps be a bit realistic!

It sometimes appears to me that we have become kilt police. Kilts have to be pleated to the stripe or the sett and nothing else. At one time the pleats had to be knife pleats and then that nasty Matt kept showing box pleats. These pleats do not fit into my style, but, may very well have asked for these kilts to be pleated this way. As Tobus said "there's really nothing "wrong" or "bad" about this" it is just a difference in style.

[denmcdough]

Not sure if you remember, from awhile back, that I had a nightmare getting what I wanted from a particular kilt maker. Now, these pics open old wounds. It has nothing to do with the OP about pleating. It does, however, show you how bad the pleats, and the kilt in general, were constructed. As Jock stated, when you pay good money for a bespoke item, you want it done correctly. Well, as it ended up, I finally got my money back.

One forum member clearly stated that the problem with my kilt was surely not the kilt. Hmm, I find that a strange comment. I had the same tartan made, later, after this ordeal, by Reid Kilts and one from Bonnie Heather Green...same measurements, and they turned out glorious. I assume the gentlemen(?) who made the statement meant that the problem was me. None of my kilts look that bad. Maybe he was drunk, or smoking wacky tobaccy.